Mobilization Limit Issues:

[barbarossa2]

Dude, can one mod the unit costs and upkeep?

[Mike Parker]

ORIGINAL: barbarossa2
There are many ways to give players "realistic and historic" army sizes without a hard ceiling that forces the many unrealistic side effects mentioned in my initial posting. IMHO, the ceiling should be soft--BUT could/should still result in average army sizes in the game which come close to historical values (even though historical values are not a statistically signifigant sampling).

I am enjoying this discussion, and I also think the hard cap would have been better done with systemic penalties that urged the player to remain within some normal range. I comment here not to be contentious but rather just to clarify.

We are speaking of a historical event. It occured once and can indeed only occur once (barring an appeal to many universe theory I suppose). To say its not enough of a sample isn't really true. Here we have a unique case where whatever data we get, barring errors in the method we recorded or collected it is quite literally THE DATA. It is the true population data. There is no distribution about a theoretical mean, there is only the plain facts of what occured.

In statistical analysis we use sampling statistics to get a handle on the population statistics. So if one were to ask the question "What percentage of American's are left handed?" we would typically design an experiment to test for this, say randomly sample 500 folks and tally the results. This would give us a sample mean as an estimate of the population mean. However, if we literally got every last American and recorded their handedness we would have the true population mean, and there would be no discussion about if our sample was valid or not, its as valid as it is ever going to be, we don't have an estimator of the percentage... we have it!

Same with this question about Napoleanic troop levels, there is only one period that occured, its not a sample out of many that occured, so to claim the sample size is too small isn't a fair critique in this case.

[dude]

ORIGINAL: barbarossa2

Dude, can one mod the unit costs and upkeep?

Yup... though this table (Master.txt) is not in the scenario folders... it's in the Data folder and will effect all games, so you will want to back it up first. There are fields in there for both the simple econ costs and the advance econ costs (which will include resource costs like textiles and timber.) There is a field for the upkeep cost as well as the time to build. There is also a field for Limit (which I believe is the max number any country can have of that unit type.)

I do wish this file could be placed under the scenario folder though. I've tried and it still only reads the one in the Data folder.

[barbarossa2]

Mike Parker,

Hahaha Now we are getting into a philisophical debate. I really only meant this tongue-in-cheek. And it certainly isn't the hub of my arguement, but just some ornamentation for it.

However, IF 18th-19th century history could be made into a game and we let people play it once, I don't think you would get an accurate measure of what "average" army size is for France in 1805 without playing 100 games and running the numbers. I guess what I am talking about is basically "playtesting history". Which we cannot do.

But, I do see your point.  We CAN take historical data (say, the number of troops per capita in Napoleonic Europe) and say, this is the average number of troops per capita historically.  Of course, I agree with you 100% there.

However, IF history is a game which has been played only once (assuming no parallel universes), then it would also be incorrect to assume that the one time the game has been played that it returned "average" values. Again, this is what game designers playtest games for dozens or hundreds of times--to determine average outcomes to aid in play balancing.

-B

[barbarossa2]

Dude, well if one can mod the purchase costs and the upkeep costs and the mobilization limits, then there really isn't any bitching to do.  
 
I suppose I can do it.  I really think purchase costs and upkeep costs might have to be increased a little... say 30%?  This would prevent the massive armies which people complained about (perhaps rightly) before the cap was introduced.
 
One problem would be that the scenario start costs for units already in play might be too high and players would have to let units go.
 
Is there a way to modify scenario start units?
 
One thing that is too bad, is that I do like the Randomizer's notion of adding a happiness penalty when the total military size starts getting huge. For the reason that Randomizer mentioned, as well as for other reasons.  I don't think we can add a fix for that.

[dude]

ORIGINAL: barbarossa2


Is there a way to modify scenario start units?

One thing that is too bad, is that I do like the Randomizer's notion of adding a happiness penalty when the total military size starts getting huge. For the reason that Randomizer mentioned, as well as for other reasons.  I don't think we can add a fix for that.

Yup... that's in the scenario folder... I think that file is Start.txt. It can be a little tricky when dealing with containers (army, corps, or fleets). If you have any problems let me know... I'll see if I can dig up the thread on the other forum where I wrote how to edit this file (I just don't recall now if it was COG1 or FOF...)

It's basically your OOB and lists all cities and diplomats too. Generals however are in a different file ... Generals.txt if I recall.

Ok, found the old thread in FOF...

The discription of putting units in containers still applies as does some of the other details but some of the file names have changed and fields... if you still have trouble I'll see about putting something better togther.

[Mike Parker]

ORIGINAL: barbarossa2

Mike Parker,

Hahaha Now we are getting into a philisophical debate. I really only meant this tongue-in-cheek. And it certainly isn't the hub of my arguement, but just some ornamentation for it.

However, IF 18th-19th century history could be made into a game and we let people play it once, I don't think you would get an accurate measure of what "average" army size is for France in 1805 without playing 100 games and running the numbers. I guess what I am talking about is basically "playtesting history". Which we cannot do.

But, I do see your point.  We CAN take historical data (say, the number of troops per capita in Napoleonic Europe) and say, this is the average number of troops per capita historically.  Of course, I agree with you 100% there.

However, IF history is a game which has been played only once (assuming no parallel universes), then it would also be incorrect to assume that the one time the game has been played that it returned "average" values. Again, this is what game designers playtest games for dozens or hundreds of times--to determine average outcomes to aid in play balancing.

-B

No problem Barba. I agree with the thrust of your comments, and in a way I sure understand what you mean when you said it, I just disagreed with any argument that we had an insufficient sample size

The better part of your argument is summed up as "Its only been done once... it would be foolhardy to suppose on the strength of that one time that it is the ONLY way it could have come out."

[Randomizer]

ORIGINAL: Mus

ORIGINAL: Randomizer

An issue seems to be how many men of military age could be recruited, trained, equipped and fielded once the sick, lame, lazy and feeble have been subtracted from the absolute minimum required to prevent agricultural collapse, economic ruin and social implosion but this is only one consideration.

I wasnt aware the lazy were exempted from conscription.

[:D]

I figured them to be first in the desert lineup...

[Randomizer]

Think I will close out my say in this amiable and interesting discussion with the following observations.

Those advocating the statistical approach that history is a lab with one-time experiment are overlooking one fundamental point as it relates to our subject. Most of the Powers on continental Europe at some point had to make the decision between an honourable peace and continued war by adapting draconian mobilization measures and in every case they chose the peace option rather than dislocating the home front.

Austria and Prussia saw their armies destroyed repeatedly followed by negotiated settlements that allowed the existing order to survive. The alternative, national mobilization on an unprecedented scale and a fight to the death does not appear to even have been considered by the rulers in question.

This did not happen just once, it was the statistical norm for the era. Even Revolutionary France selected coup d’etat and honourable peace over continued mobilization and culling the remaining wealth and manpower to create yet another army on two separate occasions, 1814 and again in 1815.

Remember that nationalism, as we know it now did not yet exist as a socio-political movement. The masses were irrelevant even as they were called upon to do the fighting and the dying. All Heads of State, Oligarch, Republican or Parliamentarian had a power base that had a vested interest in the existing order. Alienate that base and a leader would in all probability find himself exiled, executed or just forcibly retired with the plotters negotiating the best possible terms from an enemy who had every reason to grant them.

18th Century Europe was not yet wired for total war; that would come later and with a vengeance. In my view the entire Napoleonic period is a victory of reaction over revolution and about preserving the status quo but that is an admittedly subjective opinion. Total war mobilization would have destroyed the very order that the rulers were fighting to preserve.

I hope you guys can mod it out as you desire, in this particular case I see the existing mobilization cap as both generous and a historically valid limitation although this seems to be the minority opinion.

As for other wargames, I am reminded that when the IJN wargamed Operation MI the umpires introduced both the impossible and the highly unlikely into their scenario to skew the data and allow the Japanese side free reign. The one-time experiment that is History records how well that worked out for them.

Best Regards

[dude]

Randomizer:  Very good comments and analysis. 

For a historical scenario your points I believe are very valid… I would even suggest that the total war option be removed in the historical scenarios.  The problem I have with some of the hard coded limits and penalties in the game are when I want to play a “what if”.  I wouldn’t advocate getting ride of anything, but just allow more things to be easily adjusted in an options screen on start up or placed in the config files (luckily the ML is one that is already.)

I’ve never like it when gamers seem to take a stance that a game MUST be one thing over another.  For those that want a completely historical simulation they get bent out of shape when someone wants to do something un-historical (god help us if Turkey for example should be played as a power on the rise instead of decline…)  And the same applies for those that get upset that someone only wants to play by truly historical rules… I personally like to play either way at times it just depends on my mood.  I think most games can be set up to accommodate both camps and I get a little annoyed when this is overlooked.  Then there’s always the inevitable arguments back and forth on why the game was set up the way it was to appease this group over the other group… just set it up so both can play the way they want.  Don’t hard code anything.  Luckily this is one of those rare games that can very easily be modified for most things.  I can’t recall any other games that allowed this level of customization with very little effort.

I'm just not sure how many people realize how much data can be modified in the config files for this game.

[Gil R.]

The Modders Guide is about to be released -- first in the Members Club, then in the upcoming patch -- and this will provide information on what can be modded and how to mod it.

If people make mods that pertain to this issue I hope they'll report what their experiences are, either in this thread or in the modders forum.

[Anthropoid]

I hope you guys can mod it out as you desire, in this particular case I see the existing mobilization cap as both generous and a historically valid limitation although this seems to be the minority opinion.

I enjoy some what if stuff, but in this case I agree with you Randomizer. Seems fine to me how it is, unless people feel that the existing limits are too low, in which case: raise the existing limits.

Sure, modding it to have a more complex algorith to produce a scale of diministhing return/increasing punishment sounds good too, but not something I am 'waiting' for per se.

[barbarossa2]

I have been playing a PBEM as Sweden, and still thoroughly enjoy the game.  However, I am a bit exasperated with Sweden's mobilization limit of 10.  I hit this within a few months of the start of the game and it gives me roughly 60,000 soldiers (plus militia to garrison my towns).  In order to raise the number of troops under my banner, I have to capture territories and get their armies to start forming by granting them protectorate status.
 
Today, while reading about the Great Northern War, around 100 years earlier, without the benefit of the apparatus of state which was developed in the meantime, I saw the following on Wikipedia...
 
"In 1700, Charles XII had a standing army based on annual training and consisting of 77,000 men, but by 1707 this number had swollen to at least 120,000 despite casualties. It was the army with the best morale in northern Europe[citation needed], but not the greatest numerically."
 
It seems that Charles XII did better than Gustav IV Adolf would have been allowed to do.  I do understand that in 1707, Charles XII did have a few extra territories, so maybe I will try to simulate their capture and see what happens to the mobilization limit.

[Randomizer]

@-B
Looks like this is moddable (is that a word?), open the COG2Players file in the scenario of choice using M$ Excel (perhaps another spreadsheet program might work but I used Excel) and go to Column Y - MaxMobilized.
 
Change value there to what ever floats your boat (after saving the original file somewhere safe).
 
I just tried it and it seems to work barring any unintended consequences.
 
Best Regards